Gender: Female Location: When in Doubt, Go to the Library.
No, as a matter of fact I don't think that's a tough enough jail sentence.
This guy has a history of violence, as we see with his wife. Attempted murder, if she's telling the truth about "shoving her underwater while she was in the bath."
And possibly four weeks of torture? [One week till he blinded her, three weeks after?] I don't think a psych defense would've[should've] stood - doesn't that have to be in the heat of the moment or something? This is cold blooded-ly torturing and murdering a seventeen year old by a forty-nine year old man. I wouldn't be surprised if some other skeletons started to reveal themselves.
__________________
It does not do to dwell on dreams and forget to live.
In Canada, we have something called "dangerous offender" status, which, iirc, means you will never get out of prison pending some near miraculous change and psych evaluation. This guy seems like he should qualify for that.
Hopefully I'm not inferring to much if I suspect the OP is in favor of the death penalty here? either way, I wouldn't support that.
We would have given the guy life without parole in federal pounding in the ass prison.
This guy probably hasn't been raped even once. What a shame.
__________________
"The Daemon lied with every breath. It could not help itself but to deceive and dismay, to riddle and ruin. The more we conversed, the closer I drew to one singularly ineluctable fact: I would gain no wisdom here."
At least life in prison. Me personally? I think he should get the chair. An act of violence in the heat of the moment etc. is one thing, but this? The chair.
Definitely a case where that needs to be applied. I see nothing that shows he has any chance of rehabilitation, and as such he needs to remain incarcerated for good.
Thanks for adding this insightful new info to the thread topic. Now tell us what you think of the sentence levied upon this fellow, and whether it was strict enough or not.
No, you're not inferring too much. I'd like to hear your thoughts on why you wouldn't support a punishment like that.
If they are primal enough to break him and cause him to submit to affectionate stockholm syndrome and sexual favors for them, yes...so long as they are inclined and clever enough to abuse their perversely gained powers to the utmost capacity of cruelty.
An eye for an eye.
__________________ "Compounding these trickster aspects, the Joker ethos is verbally explicated as such by his psychiatrist, who describes his madness as "super-sanity." Where "sanity" previously suggested acquiescence with cultural codes, the addition of "super" implies that this common "sanity" has been replaced by a superior form, in which perception and processing are completely ungoverned and unconstrained"
That's not enough for some rich old white man who's this much a simple-minded reckless megalomaniac...with any legal form of capital punishment that is. There are methods of termination I would prefer however I will not bring them up.
What he's getting is probably worse, the Warden has probably been made aware of what's happened and told to 'do his job'. They probably don't expect this man to make it to age 69, with what he'll be exposed to behind bars when the Warden enlightens his cell mates.
__________________ "Compounding these trickster aspects, the Joker ethos is verbally explicated as such by his psychiatrist, who describes his madness as "super-sanity." Where "sanity" previously suggested acquiescence with cultural codes, the addition of "super" implies that this common "sanity" has been replaced by a superior form, in which perception and processing are completely ungoverned and unconstrained"
Its not about whether I think the person deserves to live or anything like that, I just don't believe anyone has the right to take another's life, especially in the case of the government, where it is literally a case of it-is-only-legal-because-we-say-it-is.
Isn't stockholm syndrome the result of an abused individual who acquires empathy for their captors (cell mates), mistaking relent for acts of benevolence?
Or are those just non-defining elements of it?
__________________ "Compounding these trickster aspects, the Joker ethos is verbally explicated as such by his psychiatrist, who describes his madness as "super-sanity." Where "sanity" previously suggested acquiescence with cultural codes, the addition of "super" implies that this common "sanity" has been replaced by a superior form, in which perception and processing are completely ungoverned and unconstrained"
I wont nitpick the definition, because that is close enough for the level of complexity we are talking about
the issue is, it is not the cell mates holding the person captive. Stockholm syndrome is a very specific reaction to captivity, it doesn't refer to any type of affiliation with authority figures. What you are describing is a hierarchy among captives.
I wonder if he has a preexisting condition that makes them [the sentencers] feel as if he won't last twenty years.
I'm more of an advocate for life without chance of parole. I personally don't think it's up to humans to decide to kill another human. It goes against my common sense as something along the line of "playing god." That's another reason why I see murder as such a serious crime.
__________________
It does not do to dwell on dreams and forget to live.